Milairjunkie
osher:
Well, a chap has a week to reply before it's first come, first served.
This chap may have a week to reply, but he managed to hold the show up for nearly 3 weeks just recently!
His question gets tipped, there are something like 25 responses in 3 days, some from new users & then this "chap" show up again, provides the correct answer & then for whatever reason leaves the who thing waiting for his glorious return.
It starting to urinate forum members off - "Chap" should not get involved if he cant / won't reply.
first off, how's about you back yourself down a notch or three?
Second, how's about you try being honest? I did NOT hold up the show. I posted a question. It isnt my fault that people couldnt read what was posted, and thus made wild guesses that went against what the question and subsequent hints even said. I posted that last question of mine on 2/27....not one single response for several days, so on 3/3 I posted a hint. A couple responses later, I posted again on 3/5. A couple more responses, I posted again another hint the very next day. I am so sorry to disappoint you that I am not able to be on here every single day, but the rules in this thread are what they are. If a couple days is too long for you to wait for someone to get back in and post a reply, then go start your own thread and make your own rules in it. Simple as that. You have no idea how ridiculous it makes someone look to be complaining about having to wait like this. The thread has a rule in place for just such a thing, so please, do me a favor and get over yourself. Some of us, being cancer survivors and the like, dont always have the ability or the means to hop on here just to appease milairjunkie.....
Third, there werent 25 responses to the entire question I posted unless you include mine too, so I must ask, what are you smoking? You claimed 25 responses in 3 days....why lie? there were a total of 15 responses, not counting my posts, in the whole time this question was on the table--ending with you posting a new question of your own! And another thing, I only provided the answer because it was requested that I do so. Unlike you, milair, I at least have enough respect to consider our other members here....
This is supposed to be for fun, maybe you need to take a step back or three and think about why you seem to be taking it just a tad bit too seriously, "chap".....
And now that I'm done taking out the trash, here's the question.
This aircraft was built by an American company, although the company was backed by a large Japanese entity. The plane was quite often confused with the Curtiss Jenny, an issue that Curtiss actually contributed to. The Army did purchase some, but they were deemed to be unsuitable thanks to their engines. Back in the day, a civilan pilot's first move upon buying one of these was usually to swap out the engine and replace it with the OX-5 powerplant. Name the plane....